Overwhelming hypocrisy coming from US on nuclear weapons: James H. Fetzer

I believe there is a great deal of dissatisfaction among officers where the Obama administration I believe is apprehensive that there might even be a coup and that therefore what’s going on here has a political dimension that’s not being acknowledged by the White House."

Press TV has conducted an interview with James H. Fetzer, the professor at the University of Minnesota, Madison about the failed safety and security inspection of US air force nuclear missiles, which represents one third of the US’s land-based nuclear missiles.
The following is an approximate transcript of the interview.
Press TV: How is it that the US is calling for the removal of nuclear war heads and stockpiles and in general moving towards a nuclear-free world, but at the same time we see incidences like this? How do these two statements mix?
Fetzer: I think American foreign policy is completely incoherent at present, for example, al-Qaeda is supposed to be our enemy yet there are moves to supply the Free Syrian Army, which is allied with al-Qaeda in Syria.
I think this nuclear business is perhaps more significant beneath the surface than it initially appears. On May 17, officers were, in an unprecedented move, removed of their authority to control nuclear weapons.
I believe there is a great deal of dissatisfaction in the military with Obama’s ongoing wars on behalf of Israel.
I think the creation or introduction of Secretary of Defense Hagel was a good move; Admiral Mullin is a good man. - They’re sick and tired of all these wars and I believe there is a great deal of dissatisfaction among officers where the Obama administration I believe is apprehensive that there might even be a coup and that therefore what’s going on here has a political dimension that’s not being acknowledged by the White House.
Press TV: How much does America’s nuclear stockpile make the country safer?
Fetzer: Well that’s a great question, when the Soviet Union had a massive nuclear stockpile, we had the so-called ‘mutually-assured destruction,’ which was a stable form of arrangement. I believe actually in the Middle East, if more countries had nuclear weapons and not only Israel...
If Iran had nuclear weapons, which it’s disavowed and is not pursuing I think would actually make for a more stable Iran.
At present when you have the United States gone off the rails becoming such an aggressor nation, attacking so many nations, I think it’s a very precarious situation.
And since Vladimir Putin appears to be taking a strong stand to have drawn a line in Syria I think for the United States to intervene there would be a colossal mistake and could invite a third world war.
Press TV: How much of a side effect would there be in getting rid of nuclear weapons?
Fetzer: Well, we have enough nuclear weapons to destroy the world about a hundred times over. So, you could reduce our nuclear stockpile by an overwhelming percentage, by 90 percent effortlessly and we’d still have a massive deterrent.
So the whole business with nuclear weapons has just gone, you know, out of the world; it’s uncontrolled and we need to have control. So it would be a good thing.
And yet Christopher Busby and his research on birth defects in Fallugia (Iraq) discovered that they weren’t being caused by depleted uranium, but by enriched uranium from some new class of weapons the United States was deploying there.
So I’m sorry to say, but American hypocrisy here is simply overwhelming.
SC/PR